Debates carried out in class

A DEBATE ON GMOs  vs BIO

Genetically modified food Controversies

Critics have objected to GM crops per se on several grounds, including ecological concerns, and economic concerns raised by the fact these organisms are subject to intellectual property law. GM crops  are also involved in controversies over GM food with respect to whether food produced from GM crops is safe and whether GM crops are needed to address the world's food needs.

These controversies have led to litigation, international trade disputes, and protests, and to restrictive legislation in most countries.

Proponents to GMOs claim these advantages:

-GM crops can be made resistant to viruses, fungi and bacterial growth.

-GM crops can be engineered to grow faster.

-GM crops can be engineered to be naturally pest-resistant, undermining the need for pesticide chemicals.

-GM crops can be engineered to tolerate extreme weather conditions, such as cold fronts or droughts, allowing for a geographically diverse range of growth sites.

-GM crops can be engineered with added vitamins and minerals, which is especially beneficial in third world countries dealing with malnutrition.   

Sounds great! So what’s with all of the fuss about GMOs?

- What are the possible long-term environmental effects of GM crops?

- Do GMOs pose health risks to humans?

- Could cross breeding create new food allergens?

- GM fruits, vegetables, oils and grains…what’s next? GM animals for consumption?

Although scientific studies have not proven significant ill effects on humans or the environment as a result of GMO production so far, many people argue that they haven’t been on the market long enough to see what the long-term could hold. Based on practice and tests to date, the FDA claims that it has, “not found it necessary to conduct, prior to marketing, routine safety reviews of whole foods derived from plants.”

HERE ARE DIFFERENT DEBATES CARRIED OUT IN CLASS BY THE STUDENTS

1. GMO vs ORGANIC FOOD

A debate in the classroom:  (Marina vs Sara)

TEACHER: What do you think about organic food and transgenic food? Which one is the best?

Sara: The organic food is better than the genetically modified food because they don’t have pesticides that can damage the plants so what we eat is natural and nutritional.

Marina: Even if that is true, I think that transgenic food has more advantages because it’s resistant to insects and plagues. Therefore, it doesn’t need pesticides and larger fields of crops can be produced. This way, a bigger quantity of food could be provided to human beings around the world.

Sara: I see your point, but scientists haven’t proved that the GMO food is safe for us. And … the world hunger is not caused by a lack of food but by political and social interests.

Marina: Anyway, there is no proof of its toxicity. There have been many experiments with humans and no one has had secondary effects. These days, what we do is adapt the environment to our needs so our quality of life improves. GMO are part of this process of adaptation.

Sara: Well, I think that it is very important to consider the consequences that nature will suffer if we continue doing this. For example, genetically modified crops mean a decrease in plant diversity. If we started growing up this type of food in the future we wouldn’t have different kinds of plants as we do now.

Marina: With regard to this, it wouldn’t matter if transgenic were dominant plants because they would look more appealing, be healthier and have all the nutrients that we need. As they would have better qualities we wouldn’t need any other plants.  

TEACHER: Okay girls, thit is enough for today. Thank you so much.

2. FARMERS vs GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBLE (Judith, Pablo, Ione, Alba, Jaume, Xavier and Sara)

 Presenter (Pablo): Good evening! Today we have the  Minister of Agriculture of Scotland in our program who has come here  to listen to a group of farmers who want to discuss with him their point of view about GMOs. 

Welcome everybody! Thank you for coming today. Now we can start.

-         Good evening! We are The Farmers Union from Scotland and we want to tell you the farmers’ point of view about GMOs. (addressing the Minister)

-         Aida: I’m from a 4th generation of farmers and I think that GM crops are a way to keep farmers on their land in Europe. If we don’t have more GM crops, we will become less competitive and have to import more food as well as use less sustainable farming practices.

-         Alba: I’m a cotton farmer and my opinion is that as more and more modern technology products are used by farmers and our income increased quite a lot, in my community, farmers do not lack food and clothes anymore. You cannot find a child who cannot afford their education anymore.

-         Jaume: I’m David, an old farmer, and I think there is a big future with GM crops, but if we don’t get a move on, Europe risks denying European farmers access to the biggest environmental advance that we have seen in the last 20-30 years, and at a time when we really need it. I for one would like to grow GM crops again given the opportunity.

-         Marina: We experienced a parasite problem in 1987-1988. This was the year when people treated their crops with pesticides up to 18 times. And since that year, when you grow cotton, you put it in the ground and you are worried. You couldn’t even sleep when you plant cotton because you don’t know if you can cope with the parasites. But with GMOs, when you plant, now you can sleep.

-         Judith: Biotechnology has delivered increased productivity, reduced costs and better soil management. GM seeds make soil management easier, they work well with the direct seeding technique and help to better control pests compared to conventional varieties.

Minister (Sara):

Well, we’ll try to take into consideration all your suggestions and opinions to do something about it. When I talk to the other members of the Parliament, perhaps we can arrive to a decision and consider the GMO crops in our country.

Presenter:  Okay, that was all for today! Thank you again to all of you for coming. I hope the final desicion will be benefitial for everybody.

And you! See you in the next programme! Byyyyyyyye! (addressing the camera).

3. ADS & CONS OF GMOs:  A TV DEBATE ON GMOs " BOTH SIDES OF THE DEBATE"

(Jaume vs Andres, reporter Erik)

Gerard: Hello everyone! Now we’re going to discuss about (Genetically Modified foods) GMOs with Andres (a businessman) and Jaume (a member of an ecologist organisation). GMOs are genetically modified foods and they are more resistant to environmental factors or insects. But we don’t know if GMOs are good or bad for our health. So Andres, what’s your opinion about it?

Andres: Hello! In my opinion GMOs are a good solution to fight famine in the world because with them we can obtain more quantity of food and very fast. We can also eat many different types of food during all year.

Gerard: Ok Andres, it sounds great! What about you, Jaume?Do you agree with Andres?

Jaume: Hello everybody! I think it is  dangerous to cultivate GMOs because we don’t know the consequences. This type of agriculture can be bad for human’s health and for the environment. We can’t do it because we can start a global problem worse than the actual problem of famine and I think that there are other ways to solve the famine problem.

Gerard: Ok Jaume. Andres, what do you think about what Jaume has just said?

Andres: Jaume’s opinion sounds great, but today it  is too difficult to solve famine problem without the help of GMOs. With them we can offer cheaper products and poor families will be able to buy them. And I don’t think there will be a global problem because nowadays there are countries that are producing GMOs and there isn’t any problem.

Jaume: There aren’t any problems now, but we don’t know what the situation will be like in twenty years time. We have to study the possible consequences of GMOs before we consume them.

Andres: With these ideas, science won’t go further on. We should start growing GMOs slowly.

Gerard: Andres, can you explain it please.

Andres: We should create an international organisation that establishes the rules. For example, one option is to cultivate GMOs apart from normal agriculture to avoid GMOs seeds to expand.

Jaume: Like greenhouses?

Andres: Yes, more or less.

Jaume: It sounds good, but we also have to study the effects. I’m repetitive, but we can’t start one think if we don’t know the consequences.

Andres: Yes. We can implant it slowly and control the situation very often. Then, if we see that it’s going to fail, we will stop it.

Jaume: Ok! I like this idea.

Gerard: I think we have reached an agreement. Think about it in your homes! This is all for today! Thank you very much Jaume and Andres for your opinions Goodbye!!

4. GREENPEACE ATTITUDE TOWARDS GMOs (Samuel vs Omar)

GREENPEACE: Five myths about Genetically Modified food. 

 

 

 

Five Myths about Genetically Modified food.

1^st myth: It is a solution to famines, and eases the lives of farmers.

Greenpeace: NO! Famine originates from the uneven distribution of world resources. And GM crops will only promote the commercialization of cultivation, leading to a rise in seed prices and farmer’s productions costs. All the while unable to ensure increases output.

2^nd myth: GM food is harmless to our health.

Greenpeace: NO! GM food does not undergo any long-term safety assessments before being introduced to the market. And there’s concern that eating GM food over a long period of time may lead to antibiotic resistance.

3^rd myth: Even if released, I can personally avoid eating it.

Greenpeace: NO! Greenpeace has time and time again exposed the illegal cultivation of GM rice cultivation in China. This means GM food has been put on the dining tables of consumers without their knowledge.

4^th myth: Genetic engineering can complement organic farming.

Greenpeace: NO! GE may accelerate pest insects ability to resist insecticides, while GM crops may also contaminate organic farms through the spread of pollen.

5^th myth: We can reserve GE if it’s found to be dangerous.

Greenpeace: NO! Genetic modified organisms may, through self-reproduction and hybridizing with close breeds, lead to the proliferation of alien genes in the wild. This is extremely difficult to recover.

GREENPEACE:

"Supporting organic, sustainable farming is the only way forward for agricultural future".